'Obama statement shows US again seeks regime change in Syria'

US President Barack Obama’s statement about Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has once again made clear that Washington has set regime change in the Arab country as its primary goal, says an international lawyer and political analyst.

Barry Grossman, who is based on the Indonesian island of Bali, made the remarks during an interview with Press TV while commenting on Friday, after Obama renewed his call for President Assad to step down in order to establish peace in Syria.

Obama said on Thursday militants in Syria will never stop fighting until Assad is ousted from power. "It's the only way to end the civil war and unite the Syrian people against terrorists.”

“While following the 2016 US presidential election, we may well come to miss Obama’s reluctance to  fully embrace the war agenda as hawks would have had him do, it is difficult to discern a coherent message in  his latest comment about Syria,” Grossman said.

“It is revealing that he has all but given the contrived ceasefire brokered by his secretary of state ‘the kiss of death’ by saying that even under the best of circumstances, there will be continued fighting and only regime change can pave the way for peace,” he added.

“That said, the real problem with the US position remains the same; namely, the Americans’ failure to acknowledge that it is impossible to pursue two conflicting  policy agendas – that is, regime change and the war on terror – by  promoting a conflict  that violates all principles of international law and which the US also disingenuously claims it is trying to resolve.”

‘No practical alternative to Assad’s rule’

Grossman said by “linking all hope for peace to the forced removal of President Assad, Obama has once again made it very clear that his administration has set regime change the overriding goal of its international coalition.”

“That position along with the language used by Obama and the Atlantic World’s complete failure to ‘legalize’ any military intervention in Syria, make it quite clear that the US somehow sees Syria as being legitimately subject to its directives, regardless of how Syrians feel their sovereign nation should be governed,” he stated.  

“It is entirely lost on the US-led coalition that whatever anyone thinks about Bashar al-Assad, it remains indisputable that, for the time being, there is still no practical alternative to his rule,” the analyst said.

“Blaming him personally, as Obama has again done, for all the tragic suffering resulting from this conflict as the Syrian Army has, like any other national army would do in similar circumstance, fought to defeat the foreign conceived armed insurgency, is nothing short of lunacy,” he noted.  

“In wars people die and whatever might be said about Bashar Assad, blaming him for all suffering and death in this entirely unnecessary conflict is like blaming Franklin Roosevelt for all deaths during WW2.”

Russia speaks for Syrian government?

“What clearly emerges from the current situation is that the US has cleverly contrived to let Russia speak for the Syrian government and all those who support it, while using the ceasefire - which even Obama concedes will not hold - to restrain all pro-government forces from engaging any force other than Daesh and al-Nusra just as the Syrian Army has established an all but undefeatable position from which to commence the Battle for Aleppo,” Grossman said.

“In the process, this tactic at once manufactures a moderate opposition from those all but defeated forces while providing a lens through which any and all groups which continue hostilities can be lumped in with ISIL and used by the Atlantic World’s policy making apparatus to promote its feigned war on terror,” he stated.   

“In that regard, the ceasefire makes no effort to encourage Daesh and al-Nusra to embrace the ceasefire and by its terms imposes something of an obligation on Russian to make every possible effort to reign in any and all pro-government forces  should they engage any enemy except designated terrorist organizations,” he pointed out.

'Syria ceasefire entirely unworkable'

“Indeed, by expressly contemplating the use of force to do just that, arguably it imposes an obligation on Russia to use force if necessary to uphold the ceasefire,” Grossman said.

“Of course, what the agreement does not say is just how pro-government forces are to distinguish between terrorist organizations and opposition groups on the ground, given that many of the later have long openly cooperated with the former. Indeed, this reality makes it clear that the ceasefire is, as Obama concedes, entirely unworkable,” he observed.  

“Meanwhile, in the event all armed opposition groups -- other than Daesh, al-Nusra and other designated terrorist organizations -- embrace the ceasefire, the one clear fact that will emerge from this contrived exercise is the extent to which the anti-Assad forces are completely under the control of the Saudi regime,” the political commentator concluded.  

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk